Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On 2/17/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yes, it was: you now have two duplicate tests in timestamp.sql, and
> > no corresponding test in timestamptz.sql.  It looks to me like the
> > submitter intended to be testing timestamp_tbl in the former file
> > and the same tests against timestamptz_tbl in the latter.  Please
> > recheck the diff and fix.
> >
> Tom's right.  Looking back at the patch, it was a simple coding error.
>  The test in timestamptz.sql should have been querying TIMESTAMPTZ_TBL
> not TIMESTAMP_TBL.  The intent was to run the same tests against both
> timestamp and timestamptz.
> Looks like I failed to run the parallel tests after my last round of
> modifications, as Alvaro suggested.  That was my bad.
> I'll have a patch for proper handling of invalid formatting codes
> soon.  And I'll be sure to test it in every way I can find to do so.


  Bruce Momjian  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to